Order to reopen Swiss cases was a mistake: Federation

The federation’s counsel submitted a written reply in the Supreme Court regarding the NRO verdict review case.


Express June 07, 2010

The federation’s counsel submitted a written reply in the Supreme Court (SC) regarding the NRO verdict review case on Monday.


Government counsel Barrister Kamal Azfar said that reopening of the Swiss cases was an incorrect decision on the part of the apex court.


The statement maintained that the NRO beneficiaries were neither served notices nor given an opportunity to be heard. It said that the SC made a mistake in its December 16th judgment on NRO, by asking the government to reopen all Swiss cases against President Zardari.



The statement further said that conviction in absentia has no place under the Pakistani criminal law.



The 17-member bench of Supreme Court headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudry heard the reply and adjourned the hearing of review petitions against NRO verdict till Wednesday.


While the government submitted its reply against the NRO review petition to the Supreme Court, the same bench also heard the petitions challenging the controversial 18th amendment. Two more petitions were filed in the case.

Ahmad Raza Qasuri filed a petition asking to speak on article 175 (a) to help the court to reach a fair conclusion as he was one of the founders of 1973 constitution.


The second petition, filed by Islamabad Union of Journalists argues that the 18th amendment infringes upon the independence of judiciary.


Meanwhile, Hamid Khan, the counsel for the Supreme Court Bar Association stated his arguments before the apex court.


He said the purpose of the petition was not to challenge the supremacy of parliament but to define the constitutional limits of the institutions.


The Supreme Court adjourned the hearing of petitions until Tuesday.

COMMENTS (2)

Umayr Masud | 13 years ago | Reply rosilva one: The problem with your argument is , the current judiciary is also impartial. The top judges have a history attached with them from previous years and if the current system is allowed to remain as it is , the chief justice will have too many dictatorial powers. The idea of Parliament appointing judges with opposition and government being part of the system along with the Chief is better and logical.
rosilva one | 13 years ago | Reply Time we should stop litigations. Can not allow Parliament to select and politicise the judiciary just as it has happened in USA. Judges appointed by Republicans or Democrats even in Supreme Court tow their party lines and propagate party ideologies rather then base the judgements on factual materials or analysis.
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ